When it comes to government accountability, we aren’t quite sure which is more disturbing: That Washington has received a grade of D+, or that such a mark ranks 12th best among the states.
That assessment comes from the State Integrity Investigation by the Center for Public Integrity, a nonprofit investigative news organization that last week offered up grades for each state’s openness in government. While Washington overall received what is, technically, a passing grade, that grade also must be deemed unacceptable. From the report: “Washington’s self-perception as a model state for government accountability and transparency doesn’t quite match up to findings.” The state received an F in the categories of public access to information and executive accountability, along with D-minuses in legislative accountability, judicial accountability, lobbying disclosure and state civil service management.
Adding a bit of irony, the state’s best grade was a B+ in internal auditing. That falls to the department headed by state Auditor Troy Kelley, who has been indicted on numerous federal charges related to a job he held prior to being elected in 2012.
While Washington’s grades when it comes to openness in government can be subject to debate and interpretation, there should be no quibbling about the importance of the issue. Governmental transparency is one of the cornerstones of an effective democracy, with officials being held accountable by a media and a populace who rely upon access to records and documents that cast sunshine upon the inner workings of public agencies.
Washington enacted its Public Records Act by voter initiative in 1972, and the legislation generally is regarded as providing strong safeguards for the public’s right to know. But, as the State Integrity Investigation notes, the act originally was enacted with fewer than one dozen exemptions for disclosures; today, there are more than 400 exemptions. The most indefensible of these is one in which legislators have exempted themselves from the Public Records Act, and lawmakers should work to reverse that exemption in order to better serve the people.
The Legislature also has spent years whittling down the budget for the Public Disclosure Commission, and a robust commission is crucial to the process. The PDC should work to improve the public’s access to details about meals and other gifts provided to lawmakers from lobbyists, and the delay in this regard points out the state’s slow reaction to how the digital age has transformed transparency. Making data public and searchable should be a priority for all states, and lawmakers must consider legislation to require state agencies to post information.
As noted, Washington has a long way to go in meeting its obligation for openness in government, and yet it is more responsive than many states. Oregon ranked 44th, and the fact it was one of many states to receive a failing grade should be of concern to citizens throughout the country. State governments have had much time to react to the disclosure opportunities provided by the Internet, yet many have failed to do so. Many states also have lax laws regarding the lavishing of gifts from lobbyists upon officials.
In this regard, Washington has many of the necessary laws in place. From there, as the report quotes Jason Mercier of the Washington Policy Center: “The key comes to execution and adherence.” For the benefit of good governance and the benefit of the public, Washington must continue to improve its execution.
